Gary Johnson Announcement?

[AbolishTheGovt]

Leaving one's wife, especially when she is ailing, shows an essential lack of character.

First of all, she wasn't "ailing." She had some past medical conditions, but her death was totally unexpected:

But Taos Ski Valley police officer Ramey Stevens, who with a neighbor discovered Johnson's body Friday night, remarked: "Her past medical history just apparently caught her off-guard," the paper reported. ... Friends have said she recently underwent knee surgery and was hospitalized once for a digestive disorder, but that she otherwise was a healthy woman, The New Mexican said.

Second, if you want to know how Johnson's personal life affects his governance, just look at his tenure as governor. He showed in plain view, for eight years, how little his imperfect personal life affected his governance. He may have had a failed marriage, but he still managed to veto 750 bills (more than all the vetoes of the other 49 governors in the country combined), reduce taxes $123 million annually (in a state that had never gone more than 6 years without a tax increase), cut the rate of government growth in half, eliminate the state's budget deficit, leave the state with 1200 fewer government employees (without firing anyone), shift Medicaid to managed care, privatize half the prisons in the state, stop campaign finance reform in its tracks, oversee the construction of 500 miles of new highway (all designed, financed, built, and guaranteed by the private sector), and sacrifice his neck politically in order to become the highest ranking US official to ever call for the end of the War on Drugs and to be the only Republican Governor to refuse to support George W Bush for President.

We have the opportunity to support a major, mainstream-party presidential candidate with real experience and political clout (i.e. who can actually WIN) who advocates abolishing the Fed, backing the Dollar with gold, radically reducing taxes and the size of government, ending all the foreign wars, closing all the needless foreign military installations and bringing all our troops home, restoring our privacy, restoring habeas corpus, ending the drug prohibition, saving our second amendment rights, and overturning Roe v Wade, and who was the only Republican Governor with the balls to endorse Ron Paul for President in 2008. This is a guy who proved for eight consecutive years that he means what he says and has proven that he doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk (moreso than all the other US governors combined). We cannot pass this opportunity up.

 

[justinc.1089]

First of all, she wasn't "ailing." She had some past medical conditions, but her death was totally unexpected:



Second, if you want to know how Johnson's personal life affects his governance, just look at his tenure as governor. He showed in plain view, for eight years, how little his imperfect personal life affected his governance. He may have had a failed marriage, but he still managed to veto 750 bills (more than all the vetoes of the other 49 governors in the country combined), reduce taxes $123 million annually (in a state that had never gone more than 6 years without a tax increase), cut the rate of government growth in half, eliminate the state's budget deficit, leave the state with 1200 fewer government employees (without firing anyone), shift Medicaid to managed care, privatize half the prisons in the state, stop campaign finance reform in its tracks, oversee the construction of 500 miles of new highway (all designed, financed, built, and guaranteed by the private sector), and sacrifice his neck politically in order to become the highest ranking US official to ever call for the end of the War on Drugs and to be the only Republican Governor to refuse to support George W Bush for President.

We have the opportunity to support a major, mainstream-party presidential candidate with real experience and political clout (i.e. who can actually WIN) who advocates abolishing the Fed, backing the Dollar with gold, radically reducing taxes and the size of government, ending all the foreign wars, closing all the needless foreign military installations and bringing all our troops home, restoring our privacy, restoring habeas corpus, ending the drug prohibition, saving our second amendment rights, and overturning Roe v Wade, and who was the only Republican Governor with the balls to endorse Ron Paul for President in 2008. This is a guy who proved for eight consecutive years that he means what he says and has proven that he doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk (moreso than all the other US governors combined). We cannot pass this opportunity up.

Agreed. All of that is much more than the sad facts of the failed relationship he had with his wife, no matter who is to blame, and him being pro-choice for pro-life people like me. Again since his position is correct it doesn't matter too much, but I would feel more comfortable with him being pro-life personally.

But again, I agree with you. Johnson is our best shot at 2012.

 

[RyanRSheets]

I'm just going to throw this out there...

I am terrible at relationships. I make a good friend, but a terrible boyfriend. I try to be honest and I don't lie, but I'm terrible at love. I would probably be a Gary Johnson if I ever got married. I am 100% confident that I would make a good president because I believe, deeply, in this movement and I will not be purchased.

I refuse to subscribe to the theory that a man can be judged by the quality of his marriage. In today's society few marriages last; it is a societal problem that is a result of far too much government. We don't have the time for ourselves and as such we don't have the time for eachother. A man who craves more of himself will tend to separate from others. It is actually kind of selfish for a public servant such as the president to spend time on something like marriage in my opinion; we elect him to devote himself to us.

I'm just coming out of a 4 year relationship and though I have regrets on how I treated her, I feel like it was the right action for us to end it. I feel a little more free and I feel like she can find someone more like she deserves. As it was, I would work at least 40 hours a week then I would come home and try to squeeze in being there for her and fighting for my beliefs. I love her as a person, but ultimately we were growing apart.

If you can accept this, can you accept that a man was more interested in work, or even another woman, than marriage? Can you accept that a man made the wrong decision in choosing his wife? Can you accept that self naturally precedes externality in order of priority?

I never care. I am selfish. My ultimate goal in life is to ensure that every man has the right to live his life as he sees fit. I don't want to do evil things, I just want to enjoy my life within the bounds of morality. I have the foresight to realize that marriage is not the right choice for me right now. Should I be rejected as you are rejecting Gary?

 

[justinc.1089]

I'm just coming out of a 4 year relationship and though I have regrets on how I treated her, I feel strong. I feel like I have the opportunity to be myself again. As it was, I would work at least 40 hours a week then I would come home and try to juggle my fight for Liberty and her needs. I love her as a person, but I'm working for something more important and I simply don't have the time.

I think your motives are good, but misplaced a bit.

I think our individual relationships are one of the most important things in our lives, and that means treating our families, including our spouses, correctly and in an outstanding manner.

What good is freedom if you are alone, and isolate those closest to you?

I challenge that if you isolate those closest to you and work for the good of all your country that you are no longer free, but that you have enslaved yourself to public service out of your sense of duty because you can no longer enjoy your own freedoms with other people.

I work for freedom first for my girlfriend, then family, friends and extended family, and so on all the way up to my country.

What is the proportion in that for choosing between them?

I don't know and wouldn't want to have to decide. I wouldn't want to choose for example whether I was going to have to treat my girlfriend wrong or my country wrong because it would be a terribly hard decision. I love my girlfriend and she is the most important person to me, but thats relative to me, and my country is a lot more people than just her.

It just depends on the perspective. You're looking at it from only the big picture, a collectivist perspective, but there is also a smaller perspective that you are first obligated to those that you love. Its a part of being human in my opinion.

There is duty to one's country, and there is also a moral responsibility to be a moral person which includes loving your wife and family.

The balance between those can conflict, but there is no answer to which is more important.

You could also argue it is one's obligation to work for freedom for the entire world to the disadvantage of one's own country as well, but no one here thinks in that sense because you do not feel a sense of obligation to the rest of the world.

And that is natural, and perfectly justified, just like it is perfectly justified and moral to feel more obligated to your own family than your own country.


I'm not trying to disagree with you though, or beat you up or anything though. I'm just pointing out you should be good to your family and your country, and you should sense a moral obligation to both. If I sold out my country, I would feel I have done something terrible, and if I did something wrong to my girlfriend, then I would again feel that I did something terribly wrong. They both deserve loyalty, and neither should be sacrificed for the other.





And again everyone makes mistakes so I don't hold it against Johnson or Sanford either really. I think they're both decent people. Its just a bit disapointing to see that happen to anyone.

 

[Elwar]

I wonder if those who see Gary Johnson as "immoral" also feel the same way about Ronald Reagan.

 

[RyanRSheets]

I think your motives are good, but misplaced a bit.

In retrospect I really don't like the way I worded that at all, so I reworded it

Anyhow, the point I'm really trying to make is that we shouldn't really expect that whoever we pick be a family man. I know my sentiment won't be shared by the mainstream, but I really have no problems with a president that might not put family first when in office. I feel bad for any family that has to endure neglect, but I feel awful for an entire country that has endured neglect. Ultimately the President of the United States is one of the most important if not the most important person in the world, and as such we should expect that they demonstrate the utmost dedication to their job. Unless they're in a very supportive relationship that helps stabilize them I can see no reason why we should expect a presidential candidate to have a really good record of relationships.

 

[fisharmor]

Yeah, the family thing is tricky.
At a regular job, most companies like hiring family men, because they are breadwinners and other people are depending on them keeping the job. There is more riding on that job than just a paycheck.
It's different for public servants. I suppose the family life is important for the "Fred Thompson" reason.

At the height of his buzz, I heard an interview with his wife. It was clear that she wasn't really on board with the idea.
Every debate I saw him on after that, he was a dud.
He dropped out soon after. I'm not under any illusions as to why.

Family life is important, but only insofar as it might affect the job.

 

[Firegirl]

I live in Albuquerque and have my whole life. I wasn't into politics at all when Gary Johnson was in office, but everyone knew that he was different from the other politicians and would stand up for things he believed in, even if it could cost him his career.

And since I was hanging out with massive potheads at the time, we all loved the fact he wanted to legalize pot.

Do I think he would make a good president? Honestly I don't really know. But, I can tell you he would/is a much better politician than Bill Richardson, who obviously can be bought with a little money....and look how far Richardson has gotten in Washington. So depressing. Doesn't seem to pay to be an honest politician....

So does treating your wife like crap mean you are a dishonest scumbag like the rest of them?

Or would I have someone who treats their family like crap but hasn't been involved in any bribes or financial scandals that screw the American public out of money and freedom?

Hmmmmm.....

 

[AbolishTheGovt]

I live in Albuquerque and have my whole life. I wasn't into politics at all when Gary Johnson was in office, but everyone knew that he was different from the other politicians and would stand up for things he believed in, even if it could cost him his career.

And since I was hanging out with massive potheads at the time, we all loved the fact he wanted to legalize pot.

Do I think he would make a good president? Honestly I don't really know. But, I can tell you he would/is a much better politician than Bill Richardson, who obviously can be bought with a little money....and look how far Richardson has gotten in Washington. So depressing. Doesn't seem to pay to be an honest politician....

So does treating your wife like crap mean you are a dishonest scumbag like the rest of them?

Or would I have someone who treats their family like crap but hasn't been involved in any bribes or financial scandals that screw the American public out of money and freedom?

Hmmmmm.....

Well, I would take issue with the "treating one's family like crap" remark in regard to Gary Johnson. He had a failed marriage, sure, but I'm acquainted with Gary Johnson's son Erik, and I know firsthand that Erik and Seah (Gary's kids) have an incredibly strong relationship with their dad, and Gary loves them to death. And, as far as I know, Gary and Dee remained on very civilized, respectful, and even cordial terms during their separation and divorce, unlike Rudy Giuliani who held nasty, dueling press conferences with his wife during their divorce and who tried to kick her out of the mayor's mansion; or John McCain, whose first wife dutifully waited for him all those years to come back from Vietnam, and when he finally came back, he dumped her for some uber-rich heiress to a beer corporation; or even Fred Thompson, whose first wife, when she filed for divorce against him, claimed he had acted "abusively" towards her. Heck, Ronald Reagan (also a divorcee) was notoriously distant and aloof from his children.

 

[Flash]

May be the announcement will be an endorsement for Adam Kokesh or Doug Turner.

 

[erowe1]

I wonder if those who see Gary Johnson as "immoral" also feel the same way about Ronald Reagan.

A man's faithfulness to his wife matters to me when I consider him as an elected official. I have a bunch of beefs with Reagan, but if an identical man were to run for president right now, the fact that he had been divorced and remarried decades (over 40 years I think) ago, would not be one of those beefs, because time matters. People change, and I wouldn't judge him after so long married to the same woman because of something he did so long ago that I disagree with. I wouldn't be able to say the same for Mark Sanford, however. I don't know what the future holds for him. But if he decided to run for president in 2012, I don't know if I could support him, and if I did, his recent marital problems would be a big hindrance to me. I hope he takes the next few years (or more than a few) to get completely out of the spotlight and try to to everything he can to repair the damage he did to his wife and sons. And when I look at what Newt Gingrich and John McCain did to their wives, I see utterly opportunistic, self-centered, self-righteous, untrustworthy egotists. No vow they make can be trusted. I don't know enough about Gary Johnson to say where he falls. But I won't say that it's not an issue I would have to think about.

 

[Flash]

After much thought on open borders, I'm against it. I sure hope Gary Johnson isn't a supporter of open borders or illegal immigration in general. I fail to see how a massive amount of Socialist mexicans storming into America can advance the cause of liberty. Name one time in American history where we had this amount of legal & illegal immigration from latino populations. Name one advantage it would be for our movement.

 

[rp08orbust]

After much thought on open borders, I'm against it. I sure hope Gary Johnson isn't a supporter of open borders or illegal immigration in general. I fail to see how a massive amount of Socialist mexicans storming into America can advance the cause of liberty. Name one time in American history where we had this amount of legal & illegal immigration from latino populations. Name one advantage it would be for our movement.

Talking about Mexicans in such collectivist terms is certainly no help to the movement.

But one advantage to an influx of poor immigrants (regardless of ethnicity) is that it bankrupts the welfare state more quickly.

 

[Flash]

Talking about Mexicans in such collectivist terms is certainly no help to the movement.

But one advantage to an influx of poor immigrants (regardless of ethnicity) is that it bankrupts the welfare state more quickly.

Obviously. Catholic immigrants are one of the main reasons liberals like Kennedy were elected into the congress. And this is from a guy that's descended from them. It's not like I was singling out mexicans specifically. For the most part I'm against any massive wave of immigration.

 

[Elwar]

A man's faithfulness to his wife matters to me when I consider him as an elected official. I have a bunch of beefs with Reagan, but if an identical man were to run for president right now, the fact that he had been divorced and remarried decades (over 40 years I think) ago, would not be one of those beefs, because time matters. People change, and I wouldn't judge him after so long married to the same woman because of something he did so long ago that I disagree with. I wouldn't be able to say the same for Mark Sanford, however. I don't know what the future holds for him. But if he decided to run for president in 2012, I don't know if I could support him, and if I did, his recent marital problems would be a big hindrance to me. I hope he takes the next few years (or more than a few) to get completely out of the spotlight and try to to everything he can to repair the damage he did to his wife and sons. And when I look at what Newt Gingrich and John McCain did to their wives, I see utterly opportunistic, self-centered, self-righteous, untrustworthy egotists. No vow they make can be trusted. I don't know enough about Gary Johnson to say where he falls. But I won't say that it's not an issue I would have to think about.

So...Gary Johnson has to re-marry and we wait 40 years and then he'll be a good candidate to go in and vote no against big government?

Gary Johnson has a record of principled voting against government consistently for 8 years while in an executive position in a state dominated 2:1 by Democrats, he's willing to take an unpopular stand on an issue because his stance is RIGHT, but you judge him for being one of 43% of Americans who has had a divorce (which didn't seem to be an issue for the majority of Republicans who supported Giuliani and McCain).

"The National Center for Health Statistics recently released a report which found that 43 percent of first marriages end in separation or divorce within 15 years. The study is based on the National Survey of Family Growth, a nationally representative sample of women age 15 to 44 in 1995. Bramlett, Matthew and William Mosher. "First marriage dissolution, divorce, and remariage: United States," Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics; No.323. Hyattsville MD: National Center for Health Statistics: 2 1.

 

[erowe1]

So...Gary Johnson has to re-marry and we wait 40 years and then he'll be a good candidate to go in and vote no against big government?

I didn't say anything remotely close to that. I only said that that's what happened in the case of Reagan, and that the interposition of such a long period of time is definitely a mitigating factor. I specifically said in the case of Johnson that I don't know enough to judge him on it. But I also certainly would not count remarriage as any kind of a plus, unless he were to remarry his original wife, in which case my respect for him would increase tremendously.

 

[erowe1]

After much thought on open borders, I'm against it. I sure hope Gary Johnson isn't a supporter of open borders or illegal immigration in general. I fail to see how a massive amount of Socialist mexicans storming into America can advance the cause of liberty. Name one time in American history where we had this amount of legal & illegal immigration from latino populations. Name one advantage it would be for our movement.

He's definitely a major supporter of NAFTA. That's one big minus I have against him. His pro-choice profession is another.

 

[RevolutionSD]

I'm no fan of playing politics to achieve freedom, but when 55% of marriages end in divorce and the vast majority of the remaining 45% of marriages are unhappy, co-dependent, and unsuccessful, you're going to throw this guy under the bus for getting a divorce? Wake up.

 

[brandon]

I'm no fan of playing politics to achieve freedom, but when 55% of marriages end in divorce and the vast majority of the remaining 45% of marriages are unhappy, co-dependent, and unsuccessful, you're going to throw this guy under the bus for getting a divorce? Wake up.

Yes. Weak families make for strong government. I have no desire to support a man who destroyed his family in anyway whatsoever. I despise most politicians and it doesn't take much for me to throw them under the bus.

 

[Elwar]

I wonder how many of you folks that are so sensitive about a divorce were so bent out of shape about Ron Paul's racist newsletters...

Or did his voting record help to overlook that blight?